READ THE CITIZENS' VOICE

Digital Only Subscription
Read the digital e-Edition of The Citizens' Voice on your PC or mobile device, and have 24/7 access to breaking news, local sports, contests, and more at citizensvoice.com or on our mobile apps.

Digital Services
Have news alerts sent to your mobile device or email, read the e-Edition, sign up for daily newsletters, enter contests, take quizzes, download our mobile apps and see the latest e-circulars.

Article Tools

A state agency has ruled Lackawanna County must produce most of the records it denied the county government study commission.

The Office of Open Records said the county failed to adequately explain why the records should not be public and dismissed the county argument that collecting the information was too much of a burden.

"We think every citizen should be able to go in and get public documents and find out how public monies were spent and that's what the requests were," commission Chairman Chuck Volpe said Monday. "They were very specific (requests). They were very legally and properly requested and they should have been provided. â¦ They (the Office of Open Records) left no doubt. It wasn't a close call."

The office sided with the county on one issue - producing a list of vendors. Volpe said the commission should be able to piece that list together from the other parts of its request.

"Look, it's public information with public documents," Volpe said. "We should have a right to get it. And now we know we're going to â¦ unless the county appeals and chooses to use taxpayer money to keep the public from getting taxpayer-funded documents."

It is unclear if the county plans to appeal the ruling in Lackawanna County Court.

"We are reviewing it," county solicitor Donald J. Frederickson Jr. said in an email. "No decision has been made as of this time."

The county did not dispute the records are public. Rather, the county mostly argued the commission's request was too broad and not specific enough, even after the commission narrowed its request. The state Open Records Law requires some specificity, a provision courts have upheld.

When the county denied most of its request in December, the commission appealed to the open records office.

The commission asked for:

- Copies of the county's contracts with Hildebrandt Learning Centers. Hildebrandt operates a center at the county visitors center. The county provided its original 2005 Hildebrandt contract, but said there aren't any others. The commission did not dispute this point.

- All payments to and correspondence with Hildebrandt between 2005 and Nov. 15, 2013, the date the commission asked for the documents. The county provided the payments, but denied the correspondence, saying it is exempt because negotiations on a new contract are underway. The commission contended the old correspondence had nothing to do with the current negotiations.

The open records office said the county has to comply with the request because it did not meet a key test in the Open Records Law: an agency must prove records are exempt.

- Copies of lists of approved county vendors and a breakdown of payments to those vendors from 2005 to Nov. 15, 2013. The county refused to provide the lists, arguing they do not exist, the request wasn't specific enough and that providing eight years of records was too much of a burden. The commission said the request was adequately specific.

The open records office said the county did not have to provide the lists of vendors because it does not keep such lists, but said the county had to provide the breakdown of payments because the burden of providing records is no reason to deny access to them.

- Copies of all vendor contracts and a breakdown of payments to the vendors between 2005 and Nov. 15, 2013, for the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport, the county prison and the county recycling center. The county provided the original recycling center contract, but denied the rest of this request. The county argued the request wasn't specific enough and the relevant records are so voluminous that just identifying the records would take a lot of time.

On the recycling center, the county argued the records do not exist because the county no longer operates the center. The center is run by a company owned by Dunmore businessman Louis DeNaples.

The open records office ruled the county must provide the records because the request was adequately specific and the burden of providing them is no excuse.

- Copies of all professional service contracts and payments made by the county of more than $25,000 from Jan. 1, 2008, to the present.

The county also denied this request, saying it was too broad and the county does not keep a list of contracts or vendor payments by value and would need to compile one, which would require pulling and reviewing thousands of contracts.

The open records office ruled the county must provide the records because burden is no excuse.

The commission is scheduled to host its final public meeting Thursday at 7 p.m. at the University of Scranton's Loyola Science Center, Monroe Avenue and Ridge Row. It is expected to vote on its final report recommending shifting from the present three-commissioner form of government to an elected county executive balanced by an elected, seven-member, part-time county council.

bkrawczeniuk@timesshamrock.com

We welcome user discussion on our site, under the following guidelines:

To comment you must first create a profile and sign-in with a verified DISQUS account or social network ID. Sign up here.

Comments in violation of the rules will be denied, and repeat violators will be banned. Please help police the community by flagging offensive comments for our moderators to review. By posting a comment, you agree to our full terms and conditions. Click here to read terms and conditions.